10.08. Written Claims for Compensation.
Court | Kansas |
Kansas Workers Compensation
Settlement Reporter
10.08.
Written Claims for Compensation
SummariesChapter
1010.08 Written Claims for CompensationSee Also,Herrada v.
United Bldg. Centers, Docket No. 1,028,032. (August 2006) See Also,Franco-Lopez v.
Loma Vista Nursery Inc., Docket No. 1,019,608. (October 2005). See Also,Swayne v. Cates
Service Co., Docket No. 265,630. (September 2004). April 2004. (Order) In order to receive workers'
compensation benefits, a claimant must serve written claim for compensation
upon the employer within 200 days after the date of accident. At the original
preliminary hearing, held July 31, 2003, claimant placed into evidence what was
marked as Claimant's Exhibit 4 and described as a note titled "To Whom It May
Concern," written and signed by claimant, dated September 20, 2001. It
describes the incident wherein claimant was kicked in the knee and discusses
the fact that she was provided an Ace bandage. In this instance, claimant
submitted Claimant's Exhibit 4, a handwritten statement describing the
incident, at the request of Ms. Cornejo. Ms. Cornejo acknowledged that the
handwritten document, which was presented to her, had to be prepared in order
for claimant to obtain workers' compensation medical treatment. The Board
concludes that Claimant's Exhibit 4, from the July 31, 2003 preliminary
hearing, satisfies the requirements of K.S.A. 44-520a. Thornton v. Wildwood Outdoor Education Ctr. Docket No.
1,009,701. March 2004. (Award)
Claimant was released by her treating physician without restrictions and with
no indication for ongoing treatment. Additionally, claimant later went to her
supervisor and requested a return to the doctor. This request was refused.
Pursuant to Blake and Shields, claimant was notified that ongoing medical
treatment had ceased and was no longer authorized. Therefore, the written claim
statute of limitations had began to run. Here, however, claimant submitted
compensation treatment forms, created by her authorized treating physician, to
the respondent for the purpose of obtaining ongoing medical care. These forms
satisfied the requirements of K.S.A. 44-520a and written claim was timely
served on the respondent. Reed v. Bagcraft Corp, Docket
No. 237,018. March 2004. (Award)
Claimant voluntarily quit a job that was within his restrictions which was not
good faith therefore that wage should be imputed to him, but because it paid
less than 90 percent of his average weekly wage claimant is still entitled to a
work disability. Written claim was extended to one year because respondent had
notice but did not file an accident report. Respondent argues claimant not
disabled so an accident report was not required but Board held subsequent
surgery was natural consequence of work injury so claimant was disabled for
more than a day. Story v. Aramark Uniform Services,
Docket No. 1,007,154 and 1,009,807. March 2004. (Award) Claimant was terminated for cause from
an accommodated job that paid at least 90 percent of his pre-injury average
weekly wage results in his award being limited to his functional impairment
percentage. Chavez v. IBP, Inc., Docket No.
233,298. See Also,
Jane R. Terrell v. Training and Evaluation Center For
Handicapped of Hutchison, Docket No. 1,006,036 (June 2003) October 2002. (Order) Notice and written claim
during an ongoing series of accidents are timely for past, present and future
accidents in that series. Date of accident is not a jurisdictional issue on an
appeal from a preliminary hearing order and, therefore, will not be decided
unless it is necessary to determine whether notice and/or written claim was
timely made or if claimant suffered injury by accident arising out of it in the
course of employment. Once determination is made that claimant's injury is
work-related, there is no need to affix a date nor decide how much his or her
pre-existing condition was aggravated. Nature and extent are likewise not
jurisdictional issues. Cluck v. Atchison Casting Corp.,
Docket Nos. 204,983 and 265,534 (October 2002). March 2002 (Award) In order for medical treatment to extend
the time for service of a written claim under K.S.A. 44-520a, the evidence must
show a relationship between the treatment and the injury. Here the treating
physician did not establish a direct casual connection between the surgery and
the accident. Jones vs. Winsteads and Winsteads, Docket
No. 255,913. October 2001 (Ph) A
minor injured on the job is not obligated to satisfy the time limitations of
the workers compensation act until a guardian or conservator is appointed to
represent the minor. The minor's parent does not qualify as such unless
appointed by a court of competent jurisdiction. However, once the age of
majority is reached, unless otherwise incapacitated, the claimant is subject to
the provisions of K.S.A. 44-509 and must submit a written claim within 200 days
of his or her 18th birthday pursuant to K.S.A. 44-520a. Smith vs. Rock Road Car Wash, Docket No. 265,746. March 2001 (Award) Claimant did not provide
employer with a written notice of claim. However, the Board taking into
consideration the totality of the circumstances, i.e., completion of accident
report with the employer's assistance, letters from the worker compensation
claims adjuster, and payment of medical expenses and TTD, concluded that the
documents claimant completed for the employer and the insurance carrier should
be treated as a written claim. Deshazer vs. Classic
Floors, Inc., Docket No. 241,169. January 2001 (Award) Under K.S.A. 44-557, an employer must
file a report of accident with the Division within 28 days of having notice of
a worker's injuries. Respondent argued that the notice requirement was not
applicable because claimant continued to perform his regular duties. The Board
ruled that the 28 day rule applies to a situation where, as here, claimant's
work was directly affected by the injury causing a slow down in claimant's
productivity and requiring claimant to rearrange his work schedule to
accommodate prescribed physical therapy sessions. Therefore, the claimant was
partially incapacitated from performing work for more than the remainder of the
day on which he was injured. Respondent's failure to file an accident report
within the required time frame extended claimant's written claim time to one
year. Hanlon vs. Millbrook Distribution Services, Docket
No. 247,411. October 1999.
(Award) Time for serving written claim may be extended by medical treatment
even when medical treatment is informal. In this case the time was extended
where claimant had not been rated, claimant was advised to return for medical
treatment on an as needed basis and the respondent did not withdraw its
authorization for medical treatment. Flynn v. Lindsborg
Community Hospital, Docket No. 227,770. August 1999. (Ph) Where claimant is given an Employer Report
of Accident form to fill out after requesting workers compensation benefits,
testifies she thought that by completing the report form she had done all that
was necessary to receive workers compensation benefits, and after completing
the form is provided medical treatment, the Board finds that written claim
requirements have been satisfied. Beckner v. State of
Kansas, Docket No. 234,591. See
Also, Santiago vs. City of Arkansas City, Docket
No. 250,203 (August 2000). Respondent's insurance company is an
authorized agent for the purpose of receiving an employee's written claim for
compensation. July 1999. (Ph) Claimant
signed a Form D -- settlement form -- which had the date of accident and
description of accident left blank. Respondent later filled in these blanks and
submitted the form to the Division of Workers Compensation. Claimant stated he
believed the Form D was for the 8/19/94...
To continue reading
Request your trial